Long-term life outcome studies like the Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health & Development Study (2011), in which 1,000 children in New Zealand have been followed from birth to age 38, demonstrate the critical importance of self-regulation and social skills in attaining positive academic, career and health outcomes.  Wouldn’t it be great if we could teach students these critical behavioral and social skills in the same planned and systematic way we teach academic skills? Well, we can, can’t we?  Isn’t social skills instruction an evidence-based practice proven to produce positive social and academic outcomes for students?

That was our mindset as we prepared for this article, but as we reviewed the research on social skills instruction, a more nuanced picture emerged.  In a “review of reviews”, Maag (2006) looked at the outcomes of multiple meta-analytic studies of social skills instruction conducted between 1986 and 2003 and concluded that, “The state of social skills training with students with emotional behavioral disorders seems to range from dismal to guarded optimism”.   He noted many problems in the studies in the meta-analysis, including a wide range of activities included under the umbrella of “social skills instruction”, the lack of valid outcome measures, and the lack of sound pedagogical principles, or good instruction, in many of the training programs.

In two more recent meta-analyses focused on school-based universal social skills instructional programs, however, Sklad et. al (2012) and Durlak et. al (2011)  found a more positive picture.  Both reviewed more recent studies and found large effect sizes (Cohen, 1988) for teaching social emotional skills in improving social-emotional skills.  Sklad et. al also found moderate positive effects on academic achievement, prosocial behavior and positive self-image, while Durlak found a moderate effect on academic performance.   The positive impacts on social skills were equally large at elementary and secondary schools.

Durlak et. al also examined the elements of the training programs that produced better outcomes.  They coded programs as to whether they included four recommended social skills training practices known as SAFE.  SAFE stands for:

  • Sequenced step-by-step training approach;
  • Active forms of learning, e.g., role-playing or behavioral rehearsal;
  • Focused teaching of social or personal skills; and
  • Explicit learning goals.

A large effect size was found for programs with these elements.

These findings align with the research showing that teaching students social and behavioral skills within a 3-tiered framework such as School-Wide Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS) leads to improved outcomes such as increases in attendance and achievement and reductions in office discipline referrals and suspensions (see, for example, Sugai & Horner, 2002). PBIS emphasizes the direct teaching of skills essential to school success, such as following classroom routines, following teacher expectations, and dealing with peer and adult conflict. What does social skills training look like integrated into a PBIS service delivery model?

At the Universal/Tier 1 Level, school-wide expected behaviors are defined and taught to all students in the setting in which the behaviors occur (i.e., classroom, cafeteria, hallway, etc.). Lessons take 20-30 minutes per week to teach and involve teacher modeling, student role-play, and teacher feedback (Netzel & Eber, 2003). Students are positively and explicitly acknowledged for engaging in expected behaviors.  For students identified for Tier 2 intervention based on discipline data, teacher referral, or screening measures, the same expectations and skills are re-taught in small groups and students are positively acknowledged through a standardized daily progress report card. For students identified for Tier 3 interventions through discipline data, teacher referral, screening measures, or failure to make progress at Tier 2, behaviors are taught and acknowledged through an individualized behavior support plan.

So, yes! Teaching social skills does work when done well. For educators interested in learning more about specific social skills training programs, please see our School Tool on page 3.  The Collaborative for Academic, Social and Emotional Learning has a wealth of resources for moving forward.

 

References

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.

Durlak, JA, Weissber, RP, Dymnickyi, RA, Taylor, RD & Schellinger, K (2011).  The impact of enhancing students’ social and emotional learning: A meta-analysis of school-based universal interventions. Child Development, 8w(1), 405-432.

Maag, JW (2006).  Social skills training for students with emotional and behavioral disorders: A review of reviews. Behavior Disorders, 32(1) 5-17.

Moffitt, TE, Arseneault, L, Belsky, D, Dickson, N, Hancox, RJ. Harringotn, H, Houts, R, {oulton, R, Roberst, BW, Ross, S, Sears, MR, Thomson, WM &Caspi, A (2011).  A gradient of childhood self-control predicts health, wealth, and public saftety. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(7), 2693-2698.

Netzel, D.M, & Eber, L (2003). Shifting from reactive to proactive discipline in an urban school district: A change of focus through PBIS implementation. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 5, 71-79.

Skald, M, Diekstra, R, de Ritter, M & Ben, J (2012). Effectiveness of school-based unidersal social, emotional and behavioral programs:  Do they enhance students’’ development in the area of skill, behavior and adjustment? Psychology in the Schools, 49(9), 892-909.

Sugai, G., & Horner, R. H. (2002). The evolution of discipline practices: School-wide positive behavior supports. Child and Family Behavior Therapy, 24, 23-50.